AI chip stocks slide hard as Nasdaq drops again, though Morgan Stanley and analyst Dan Ives urge a “healthy” read-through

US shares pushed lower again on June 23, with the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite down more than 2% at the time of the report and moving toward what the post described as its second-worst single-day performance after an earlier 4% drop in the same month.

Within that broader pullback, the report flagged a sharp decline in AI-related chip stocks, grouping together companies that investors have tended to treat as proxies for future spending on artificial intelligence infrastructure and devices.

AMD was named among the companies hit as part of the selloff, alongside other high-profile semiconductor and technology equities mentioned in the headline. The post did not provide company-specific filings, guidance changes, or trading volumes in the text available to this story.

The market reaction was also shaped by commentary from well-known research and media watchers. The post credited analyst Dan Ives with downplaying the selloff, arguing in effect that the move may not represent the kind of damage investors fear.

It further pointed to a Morgan Stanley note attributed to an analyst identified in the headline as Slimmon, who characterized the chip-stock rout as “healthy.” In the context of a fast-moving tape, that language typically indicates expectations that valuation or sentiment pressures may be resetting rather than that end-demand has definitively cracked.

Even as the day’s declines looked aggressive, the post framed the selling as part of a sequence rather than a one-off event, emphasizing that the Nasdaq had already been hit earlier in June. That matters because investors often interpret multiple down days as either a broader macro-driven risk repricing or as a series of sentiment-driven de-risking cycles.

For AMD and peers, the practical question investors tend to ask in these moments is whether AI-related spending expectations are merely being repriced or whether there are early indicators of demand softness. Chipmakers remain sensitive to read-throughs from hyperscaler capex plans, GPU and accelerator supply timing, and broader electronics demand, even when those drivers are not explicitly discussed in a given trading-day report.

The limits of the available material are important. The post did not lay out fresh AMD fundamentals, such as specific changes to revenue outlook, product shipment data, new contracts, or any regulatory or earnings-related developments, and it did not include the full text of the cited Morgan Stanley or Dan Ives comments. As a result, the “healthy” framing should be treated as an interpretation of price action and sentiment rather than proof of underlying demand resilience.